﻿2 PLEISTOCENE MAMMALIA. 



P. E. Briickmann 1 (1732) was the first to compare these cave-bones with those 

 of bears. J. F. Esper 3 (1774) gave figures of a large number of bear-bones found 

 in a cave in Fran coma, but in default of material for comparison was unable to 

 decide definitely that they belonged to bears, though he noted the resemblance. 

 Later on Esper 3 (1784), having obtained the skull of a polar bear, adopted the 

 view that the cave remains were to be attributed to the same species. 



In 1794 John Hunter* compared a fossil skull, which had been referred to 

 the polar bear, with the skull of the last-mentioned species, and noted various 

 differences, though cautiously observing that great changes in the shape of the 

 skulls of Carnivora occur during their growth to maturity and old age. 



In 1795 J. C. Kosenmiiller 5 recognised differences between the brown, white, 

 and cave bears, and gave a table of comparison between the skulls of these three 

 forms printed in parallel columns. He was also the first to apply the name Vrsus 

 spelseus to the cave bear. 



In 1804 Rosenmiiller G published a folio volume in French and German dealing 

 solely with the cave bears, and fully described their remains, concluding with a 

 suggestive chapter on the conditions under which bones found in caves might have 

 accumulated. He also emphasised the fact that differences in skulls depend not 

 only on age (as noted by Hunter), but also on sex. 



Meanwhile, the study of fossil bears was undertaken by Blumenbach and 

 Cuvier. The former 7 arrived at the conclusion that the German caves contained 

 not only Ursus spelseus, which he regarded as distinct from all living species, but 

 also another form which he named U. arctoideus, intending thus to indicate its 

 relationship to the brown bear. Cuvier 8 (1806) confirmed Blumenbach's statement 

 that some of the larger bones from the German caves indicated specific differences 

 from all living bears, and also agreed with the suggestion that they represented 

 two extinct forms — TJ. spelseus with the forehead arched, JJ. arctoideus with the 

 forehead flat — the latter approaching living species more closely than the 

 former. 



1 'Breslauer Samml.,' 1732, p. 628; and 'Epist. Itin.,' 32. 

 - ' Ausfiihrliche Nachricht zoolith. Bayreuth.' 

 3 ' Merits Soc. nat. Berlin,' v, p. 56. 

 * 'Phil. Trans.,' lxxxiv, 1794, p. 407. 



5 ' Beitr. G-eschiclit. f&tJ. Knochen,' p. 44 (German reprint of the same author's ' De Oss. foss.,' 

 Leipzig, 1794). 



6 Abbild. u. Beschreib. der foss. Knochen des Hohlenbiiren,' Weimar. 



7 Quoted by Cuvier, ' Bull. Sci., Soc. Philomath.,' no. SO. This reference is taken from de 

 Blainville, ' Osteographie,' Carnassiers, p. 46. It is quoted apparently from him by Owen, ' Brit. Foss. 

 Mamm.,' p. 86, and by other subsequent writers. In the official catalogue of Cuvier's papers the title 

 appears without any reference as to where the paper can be found. The paper cannot be traced, and 

 was probably suppressed. 



8 ' Annales du Museum,' vii, p. 324. 



